HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Personal Folders Download to citation manager Permission Requests Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Fiser, W. P. Articles by Read, R. C. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Fiser, W. P. Articles by Read, R. C.

The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Vol 89, 63-70, Copyright © 1985 by The American Association for Thoracic Surgery and The Western Thoracic Surgical Association

ARTICLES

Cardiovascular effects of protamine sulfate are dependent on the presence and type of circulating heparin

WP Fiser, JE Fewell, DE Hill, RW Barnes and RC Read

Man's response to clinical doses of protamine is highly variable. We investigated the influence of circulating heparin in nine swine (mean age 6 weeks, weight 10 kg). Through a sternotomy we implanted an electromagnetic flow probe around the pulmonary artery for cardiac output determination and catheters into the ascending aorta, pulmonary artery, right atrium, and left atrium for pressure monitoring. Each animal was allowed to recover and was studied awake on 3 consecutive days. Protamine, 3 mg/kg, beef lung heparin, 300 U/kg, and pork mucosal heparin, 300 U/kg, followed by protamine, were given in rotation by intravenous bolus. Protamine alone had no effect. Beef lung heparin followed by protamine induced a marked increase in pulmonary artery pressure (mean 38 +/- 3 to 51 +/- 5 mm Hg in 3 minutes). Pulmonary vascular resistance doubled (mean 0.12 +/- 0.01 to 0.23 +/- 0.04 R within 4 minutes), returning to normal within 15 minutes. Cardiac index and aortic pressure changed minimally. Pork mucosal heparin followed by protamine induced a similar but greater increase in mean pulmonary arterial pressure; however, cardiac index fell significantly (p less than 0.05, 207 +/- 16 to 117 +/- 16 ml/kg/min-1 at 1 minute) despite a regular rhythm and adequate left atrial filling pressure. Thus cardiac contractility was depressed. Systemic hypotension occurred in three of nine pigs. Both mean pulmonary vascular resistance and systemic vascular resistance increased (0.12 +/- 0.01 to 0.67 +/- 0.25 R and 0.40 +/- 0.04 to 1.09 +/- 0.25 R, respectively), significantly (p less than 0.05) more with pork than beef heparin. These data demonstrate that cardiovascular response to protamine neutralization varies significantly in regard to the type of heparin used. Furthermore, circulating heparin is required to produce those effects previously attributed to protamine alone.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				C. Aren Review article : Heparin and protamine during cardiac surgery Perfusion, July 1, 1989; 4(3): 171 - 181. [PDF]